latin america towards imminent processes of harmonization ...€¦ · latin america towards...

www.ocides.org

Jahir Fernando Calvo - [email protected]

Latin America towards imminent processes of harmonization and

integration into common spaces of Higher Education:

A first set of considerations and analysis for reflection

Hacia un Inminente proceso de Integración y Armonización en la Educación Superior

Latinoamericana

Jahir Fernando Calvoi

Organización para la Cooperación, Investigación y el Desarrollo de la Educación Superior (OCIDES).

Kassel, Alemania. Diciembre 2009.

www.ocides.org


Introduction

As many other regions all over the world, Latin America (LA) is not unconnected

with the need, indeed the urgency, to develop strategic regional alliances and pursue a

similar Higher Education (HE) modernization agenda that are currently undertaking

others regions and countries in the globe in order to react to the demands resulting from

globalization and internationalization in HE. In more or less, this agenda implies, the need

to develop new convergence initiatives that allow greater students and staff mobility,

mutual trust and transparency, recognition of qualifications and degrees, and academic

and research cooperation.

Under this inevitably scenario, we note that Higher Education systems (HES’s)

from LA have realized this urgency and have been addressing some projects aimed at

developing mechanisms and also guidelines to move towards the creation of common

spaces of HE in the years to come in which be able to cope, within a common platform for

HE cooperation, the above mentioned critical issues of the millennium HE worldwide

agenda, while promoting both their attractiveness and competitiveness within the new

highly dynamic and demanding academic environment. Notably, the limited progress

achieved is a clear signal that this ambitious goal is a complex and challenging one, due to

the fact that the region faces several obstacles and also is lacking in features to cope

successfully with it.

The European experience - with its very often questionable Bologna Process that

has achieved a new milestone in the history of HE reforms in the world- excels today as

the initiative that has reached more progress in this ambitious endeavor. The same

provide an enriched learning experience for those other regions such as LA, which are

willing to give more impetus to their current efforts of harmonization and regional

integration in HE.

Based on the above, this term paper aims at making a call to reflection about the

topic through a first set of considerations and analysis of this imminent harmonization of

the Latin American HES’s and their subsequent incorporation into common spaces of HE.

To do so, we will address the issue since its global context until finally landing in the

reality of the region and its most ambitious projects in this regard.

www.ocides.org


The title of this paper alludes to the idea of imminent because we want to stress

first, the key role that should play the topic within the HE agenda of the region after the

recent urgent and emphatic call made by the participants of the Regional Conference on

HE 2008 to all the members of educational communities, bodies and actors involved in

policy and strategic decisions in HE within the region, to take the commitment and not

delay the academic integration of the region in order to create the future of America

(“Declaration of the Regional Conference,“ 2008). Second, the multiple declarations and

agreements that have been signed in this respect which have repeated over and over

again this same commitment to be assumed, and last but not least, the harsh reality of

globalization and internationalization in HE that we are all facing and from which we can

not escape.

The structure of this paper provides firstly, a glimpse of the role that globalization

and internationalization in HE have played in forcing regions to seek challenging and

inevitable mechanisms of convergence and integration of their HES’s. The second section

in turn, gives an overview of the most advanced and ongoing effort in initiating

harmonization and integration of regional HES’s in the world: The Bologna Process, a

reference framework for similar efforts elsewhere in the globe. The third section in turn,

raises the realities facing LA in terms of its HE context and historic and modern

institutional patterns towards a process of harmonization and integration into common

spaces of HE. And finally, the fourth section will explore in brief the genesis, content,

development, results and/or expectations of the two most ambitious regional scale

initiatives in harmonization and integration in HE which involve LA at this moment: The

European Union, Latin America and the Caribbean (EULAC) Area for HE, and the Latin

America and Caribbean Area for HE (ENLACES).

The information presented throughout this paper was collected in the first

instance from various academic papers and documents available in electronic version

from journals, virtual libraries and some other sources from organizations related to HE.

We also resorted to some chapters of books written by authors that have done research

on the topics discussed here. Special attention was paid also a some declarations and

www.ocides.org


official documents related to the processes of harmonization and academic integration

explored.

1. Undertaking harmonization and academic integration processes: The

forces of globalization and internationalization of Higher Education

Higher Education institutions (HEI’s) all over the world are facing new demands,

trends and challenges related to the forces globalization and internationalization in

Higher Education (HE). Altbach et al. (2009) describe them as a key reality in this new

century XXI that has already profoundly influenced our Higher Education systems (HES’s),

leading the same to arrive to a step for urgent international discussions, cooperation and

agreements. Yavaprabhas (2008) in turn, is more specific when stating that these key

realities have potentially contributed to the development and transformation of the

HES’s, re-shaping their nature somewhat and forcing their different actors and bodies to

development multiple agendas to deal with them.

Certainly, the new millennium allows us to witness one of the most visible

manifestations of these forces in the area of HE: Student mobility. According to Altbach

et al. (2009), up to present, there are -at the very least- 2.5 million students -countless

scholars, degrees and universities- moving around the globe, and this number will rise to

7 million by 2020.

In spite of this optimistic estimation made by these authors, however,

Yavaprabhas (2008) argues that, nowadays, while most of the HEI’s around the globe

encourage student mobility within the new global HE environment we are facing, it is a

fact that in most of the countries and regions still remain several obstacles deterring or

not facilitating this and other aims. Unfortunately, it is also pointed out by the author that

there is also a lack of an agreed set of infrastructure in HE. In the course of this last

consideration, he provides some examples: “the incompatible academic cycles, the

quality assurance procedures (or the lack thereof), the recognition of qualifications

provisions and also domestic regulations” (p. 3). Within this scenario, he considers the

www.ocides.org


harmonization1 and academic integration of HES’s through concerted regional efforts, as

the best tool to cope with these structural problems.

In trying to analyze some of the implications of harmonization and regional

integration into a common spaces of HE, Yavaprabhas (2008) remarks that one should no

forget that these are a processes that recognize diversity of HES’s and cultures and that

the same do not mean, however, the promotion of uniformity or standardization of

HES’s; rather, they must strive for the development of mechanisms and general

guidelines about degree and qualification comparability and recognition, quality

assurance, credit transfers, and so on.

Altogether, it is difficult to elucidate deeply all the implications of this sensitive

and comprehensive topic. Ironically, remarks as “globalization carries with it the idea of a

process of creating a single world on the planetary scale” (Zarur, 2008, p. 180) or

“globalization lead to an erosion of the national regulatory and policy frameworks in

which universities are embedded” (Van Damme, 2001, p. 2) take us to really wonder

about the future of the identity of each one of the region’s HES’s towards the current and

futures processes of harmonization and integration in HE within the actual global

context. It could be argued that these are already irreversible phenomenon, a fact of life

that cannot be wished away, but the true is that the topic merits further research.

Indeed, we note that nowadays different actors and bodies specialized in the field are

debating and re-thinking about them, due to their several open questions.

2. Europe as a reference of harmonization and academic integration

processes

2.1. The Bologna Process: The basis of the European experience

Lazzari (2008) in her unpublished master's thesis points out that in June 1999

happened one of the most outstanding developments of the international dimension of

Higher Education (HE) in Europe, since it meant the reconfiguration of the Higher

1 Process that seeks to establish a correspondence or compatibility between different qualifications and degrees conferred by HEI’s in different countries (Beneitone et al., 2007, p.311)

www.ocides.org


Education systems (HES’s) in that region. The literature reviewed through this and other

sources notes that this event occurred in Italy, city of Bologna, when ministers in charge

of HE from 29 European countries formalized a voluntary and historical agreement in

order to start the establishment of a compatible framework for its HES’s. This agreement

was named the Bologna Declaration (BD), and the entire process with its reforms involve

is often referred to as: “The Bologna Process” (BP). Up to present, this BP encompasses

46 European countries in a strong partnership of public authorities, Higher Education

institutions (HEI’s), staff and students, and other important stakeholders, which together

are striving to harmonize all the participating European HES’s in order to achieve their

regional integration into a common “European Higher Education Area” (EHEA) by 2010.

(Benelux Bologna Secretariat, n.d.; Lazzari, 2008).

As stated by Malo (2005), the simple fact that Europe -one of the most prosperous

regions of the world- had decided to embark on this BP is, clearly, enough reason for

calling worldwide attention. Undoubtedly, this commitment refers to a challenge not only

for the HEI’s of that region, but also for several national and international actors and

bodies related to policies in HE in Europe (Ravaioli, 2009). According to Reyes (n.d.), in

the European experience we find the basis for a new world model of HE. What is more,

the author led to the conclusion that Europe with its BP has a special attractiveness for

the academic world when considering student and staff mobility, common space, quality

assurance and regional cooperation. By taking into account these four key features

pointed out by this author, we might assume that Europe is striving to become the most

attractive, competitive, efficient and dynamic region of the world in terms of HE.

Obviously, we have to bear in mind, though, that this assumption means a very ambitious

goal for this region, due to the sensitiveness and complexity of such a reform process.

Today, ten years after the historical agreement signing in the city of Bologna, and

about one year to complete the initial agenda, it could be arguable the progress reached.

In this respect, some researchers and followers of the BP have pointed out that it has

reflected enormous and substantial progress (see Altbach et al., 2009; Education,

Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, 2009). However, despite this progress

reached, the ministers responsible for HE in the 46 participating countries of the BP

www.ocides.org


accepted in the last Ministerial Conference held in Belgium in April 2009 that not all the

objectives have been completely achieved by all the country members. What is more, the

ministers appealed that the full and proper implementation of these objectives will

require more time and commitment, even beyond the deadline of 2010. (“Communiqué

of the Conference of European Ministers,“ 2009).

Clearly, this revelation has led to the assumption that by 2010 the outcomes of this

BP will be more modest than originally hoped. Unfortunately, this disclosure does not

come as a surprise for some researchers in the field. Teichler (2007), years ago, had

already predicted that is unlikely to implement all the objectives in a short period of time,

referring obviously to the 2010 deadline. What is more, he argued at that time, that the

core decisions of the BP might even require deeper analysis and reflection. These

previous arguments, tough, seem to be underscored on the fact that the implementation

of the reforms in each participating country arose new challenges not foreseen

(Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, 2009).

Nonetheless, despite all obstacles and constraints emerged in the challenging task

of implementing the BP with its reforms, it is interesting to note the strong commitment

of a region for continuing shaping its ideal of HE. This statement, of course, is based on

the fact that there are clear evidences indicating that the actors of this BP are getting

ready to assume a new vision and strategies for advancing the reforms post 2010. For

instance, the European University Association (2008) has already suggested a new vision

based on the consolidation of actual achievements, in monitoring unfinished goals in

order to guarantee their success, in fostering communication and in the optimization of

existing reforms. Further, in the context of reformulating the vision and setting up new

strategies for the future of this BP, it should be noted that an extraordinary Bologna

Ministerial Anniversary Conference will be held in Budapest and Vienna on March 2010 -at

the time originally planned for launching the EHEA- to review and assess the progress

made towards the achievements of this independent intergovernmental initiative

(Benelux Bologna Secretariat, n.d.).

www.ocides.org


2.2. Bologna as a reference for Higher Education reforms worldwide

According to Yavaprabhas (2008), outside Europe, the processes of harmonization

and integration in the area of HE are still in an embryonic stage of development. As a

consequence, states Altbach et al. (2009), the European experience has become a

reference for similar efforts elsewhere in the globe. This statement, of course, was

supported by the Working Group on the External Dimension of the Bologna Process

(2006) which in its first report has confirmed that, indeed, there are now numerous

echoes of Bologna from other parts of the world. In the opinion of this working group,

Bologna has had this external impact because it has been coping with a similar HE

modernization agenda being pursued by these others regions and countries.

In thinking about this external impact, a question comes immediately to our mind:

Should really the Bologna agenda with its particular reforms be applied or extended to

these other regions and countries? Mohamedbhai (2005), former President of the

International Association of Universities wondered in 2005 the same. Without giving an

accurate response, he just stated that until that date (2005) there had been limited

organized debate on this issue. The Working Group on the External Dimension of the

Bologna Process (2006) in turn, recognized that Professor Mohamedbhai raised a

provocative question, and any attempt to answer the same would demand seriousness

and detachment of any Euro-centrism. Further, this working group pointed out that the

dilemma is what should be applied or extended: The “Bologna reforms” or the “Bologna

idea”? In this respect, the group stated that the first option, the “Bologna reforms”,

understood the same as recipes, could be a very questionable choice. Conversely,

considering the “Bologna idea”, understood the same as the philosophy behind this BP

process, could be quite the opposite.

According to Tiana (2009), the most important consideration is not the reforms

themselves, but the ideals that have driven them and the answers that have been given

to them. Tiana has the view that although it is too early to predict what might be the

outcome of this European experience in the medium and long terms, the same could be

considered an interesting mirror and an enriched learning experience for other countries

www.ocides.org


or regions in the process of developing or wishing to undertake similar initiatives,

allowing making progress more easily and avoiding the mistakes of Europe.

Anyway, learning from the European experience will not be a difficult task.

Nowadays, there is a lot of documentation (analysis, academic papers, etc) about the BP

and its implications. Apart from that, the main actors of this BP have already accepted

their commitment for enhancing the understanding of this reform process by sharing

their experiences with these other regions and countries of the world interested in the

topic (“Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers,“ 2005).

3. Latin American reality towards a process of building common spaces of

Higher Education

According to IESALC (2009), the idea of building a common spaces of Higher

Education (HE) in Latin America (LA), as is been planned in Europe, is not new. It has been

repeatedly expressed by different actors in the region in various stages of discussion and

meetings, however, these efforts are still timid and limited because of several obstacles

such as the lack of a supranational organization capable to mobilize and ensure the

adhesion of countries to regional programs, the lack of resources, the lack of coordinated

and collaborative links between the Higher Education institutions (HEI’s), the prevailing

gaps between the Higher Education systems (HES’s) of the region, the resistances to

change -which appears to be very strong and in urgent need of attention-, and last but

not least, the lack of commitment of the countries to implement the proposals.

Ironically, as Zazur (2008) pointed out, there is more progress in declarations than

in carrying out concrete actions to insert the activities, projects and programs proposed

into the regular implementation of policies and practices of the countries, demonstrating

also the inexistence of coordination mechanisms between the committees, HEI’s, and

government authorities. Under this scenario, the above named author raised several

questions to reflection regarding the current status and disposition of the region to

undertake a process such this, the actions that still have to be taken in order to really

foster the initiatives in the region, the entities that could truly contribute to join a

www.ocides.org


maximum of trust with a minimum of the conflicting interests that are so frequent in this

kind of processes, and the way to overcome the statutory and bureaucratic concerns that

always appear in these initiatives. We must say that there is no simple answer to any of

these questions, and any attempt to do so must address and understand a broad range of

other realities that are also part of the Latin American HE context and the region’s

historic and modern institutional patterns.

In illustrating the variety of issues about the Latin American HE context, we will

bring some approaches from researches that have found and agreed that we are dealing

with several HES’s that are deep in asymmetries and qualitative and quantitative

differences and deficiencies, which, certainly, makes it difficult to carry out joint efforts in

the terms of a HE integration. Brunner (2009), for instance, states that HE in the region is

been subject to intense centrifugal tendencies, organizational diversification, competitive

pressures and little capacity to cooperate; circumstances that are increasing the level of

divergence, rather than taking it down. On the other hand, he argues, there is a lack of

comparative institutional typologies, absence of agreed comparative criteria, and a rigid

curriculum without a credit transfer system that would enable the computing of studies

already achieved, validate acquired skills and define individual learning paths in order to

promote student mobility. What is more, underscores the author, in the Latin American

HE model, we find that governments are relatively impotent faced with HEI’s whose

autonomy has become almost absolute during the 20th century, not allowing them a

decisively intervention in the coordination of their HES’s. Beneitone et al. (2007) in turn,

found that within the region, the progress in quality assurance and accreditation is still

weak and not uniform. In addition, HEI’s are supervised in different ways, and there is

disparity in the grade scale used, even within a single institution. Apart from that, Zazur

(2008) pointed out that there is no standardized use of terminology, and the

qualifications acquired and the contents of diplomas have lack of legibility and

transparency. Further, regarding the different supranational projects, organizations and

networks that have been created, Malo (2005) stresses that most of them are based only

in national interests and visions, some regional, but never in a continental level. Finally,

states Dido (2006), there is no mutual trust between the systems.

www.ocides.org


In the course of all the above structural, organizational, and functional issues that

clearly require careful consideration, Brunner (2009) predicts hat the task of building a HE

common space in LA, as is happening in Europe, beyond the enthusiasm and hopes of

some Latin American’s government officials, university administrators, and academics,

would be difficult, discouraging or even an unlikely goal. This prediction, however drastic

and discouraged as it is, does not come as a surprise, if we look also at the history of

hopes and frustrations of any process of integration in the region. In supporting this

argument, we resort to a new element for analysis: The Latin American historic and

modern institutional patterns.

A first summary of considerations from Brunner (2009), thus, suggests that in LA it

is easy to find little, if not zero, common ground (neither political, nor economic, nor

monetary and less so a common knowledge space) to which appeal, whereupon the

speeches of integration, apart from being devoid of content, objectives, goals, and

instruments to bring them to fruition, as well says the author, are found floating freely in

the air. What is more, Brunner claims that LA remains as a block of countries grouped

together by geography, history, and languages but separated by all the others remaining

factors.

Reyes (n.d) in turn, underscores the fact that the different integration efforts that

have been carried out in the region have been characterized by their implementation

according to the interests of national and international groups, and for their high level of

rhetoric and called for a LA unity. Moreover, Lazzari (2008) in her research work

identified two new elements: The political instability in the region, which usually has

slowed down the various attempts in realizing a stronger cooperation in many fields, and

the conflicts of power and interests that have prevailed in the current configuration of

the region in three sub-regional structures of political arrangements: The Integration

System for Central America (SICA), the Andean Community (CAN), and the Common

Market of the South (MERCOSUR). Further, Malo (2005) emphasized, paradoxically, that

not even the shared ideals of the region, such as the dream raised by the Liberator Simon

Bolivar to see a united LA, have had the scope and strength enough to give the region a

sense of direction, organization and response.

www.ocides.org


4. Ongoing initiatives for building areas for Higher Education in Latin

America

4.1. European Union, Latin America and the Caribbean (EULAC) Area for Higher

Education

This project, even if not the first attempt of integration in terms of Higher

Education (HE) in the Latin American region, was the first echo of Bologna that reached

Latin America (LA). The idea of developing a strategic partnership for the strengthening

of bilateral and multilateral cooperation and interaction in Higher Education (HE) within

these tree regions stems from the First Summit of Heads of State and Government of LA,

the Caribbean and the European Union (EU), held in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in

June 1999 -immediately after the signing of the Bologna Declaration. A year later, the idea

was formalized and presented as a EULAC Area for Higher Education in the first EULAC

Ministerial Conference on HE held in Paris in November 2000. In the declaration prepared

for this meeting, the action framework of this project was established, including, among

others, the encouragement towards better comparability of degrees, student and staff

mobility, and the establishment of a compatible credit systems in order to facilitate

recognition and validation. In addition, a Follow-up Committee was established with

representatives of the three regions in order to co-ordinate and develop the project

proposal and agenda. (“The European Union - Latin America - Caribbean Ministerial

Conference on Higher Education,“ 2000).

The first plan of action of this project for the period 2002-2004 was submitted and

approved at the Second Summit of Heads of State and Government of Madrid (2002),

defining its objectives, strategies and specific projects. In this regard, the EULAC Area for

HE was defined as an area open to a plurality of cultures that, rather than being just a

mechanism for coping with globalization, would help to overcome the differences in the

region and develop further collaboration, cooperation, exchanges of good practices and

reciprocity, with equality and solidarity, recognizing at all times the differences and

similarities, as well as the diversity of languages and the variety of Higher Education

www.ocides.org


systems (HES’s). On the other hand, it is stated that the student and staff mobility and

the assessment of the quality of HE constitute the two main priorities for the project

within the aforementioned period. To achieve these, the plan set out several strategies,

including: To take into consideration the initiatives and experiences of each one of the

countries and regions involved, the mobilization of all necessary national and regional

resources, the encouragement of collaboration between universities, research centers

and the private sector, the stimulation of reciprocal recognition of HE assessment and

accreditation procedures, and the creation of assessment devices. (“Plan of Action

Project 2002-2004,“, 2002)

The need to provide continuity of this regional project led the EULAC heads of

state and government, gathered at their Third Summit in Guadalajara, Mexico in May

2004, to agree a new extension of the first plan of action until 2008. In this context, this

second plan of action 2005-2008, including its strategies, the strategic document

"Horizon 2015", the principles of cooperation in the EULAC Area for HE, and the new

projects to be executed, were submitted and approved in the second EULAC Ministerial

Conference on HE held in Mexico in April 2005. Among the new strategies

proposed stood out: the mutual awareness, involvement by all members, the

identification and reduction of barriers, and the identification of funding sources and

mechanisms. (“Estrategias hacia la construcción del espacio común ALCUE,” 2005). In

talking about the time horizon of 2015, this action plan established that by 2015 the

EULAC Area for HE should be launched, having the following characteristics: An

important development of mechanisms and networks of cooperation and exchange,

comparability mechanisms, effective mobility programs, clear funding sources, etc.

(“Horizonte hacia la construcción del Espacio Común ALCUE,“ 2005).

Since the formalization of this project in November 2000, the countries member of

the EULAC partnership, sixty (60) to date, have met periodically throughout the past

years to work in its consolidation by 2015. During this time, it is noted that LA and the EU -

thought the European Commission- have been developing several collaborative

initiatives related to the promotion of the project. Brunner (2009) highlights three of

www.ocides.org


them as the most important: The 6×4 (six professions around four axes) project2, the

ALFA–Tuning–Latin America project3, and Proflex4 (Flexible Professional in the

Knowledge Society) -the LA version of the European Reflex project-. At the same time,

points out also the author, a group of academic organizations, associations, and

networks have been constituted to sustain and feed the development of the EULAC

initiative.

However, in spite of the above accomplishments, Zarur (2008) states that the

inclusion of the objectives outlined in the EULAC plans of action has not been reflected

yet in the public policies of the majority of the 19 Latin American countries members of

the partnership, except, perhaps, for those that comprise the Follow-up Committee. In

this respect., Dido (2006) also acknowledges that the project is suffering from absence of

strong political commitment amongst Latin American participating countries because it is

noted the limited progress in the promotion of public policies to make it a reality.

Unfortunately, this argument does not come as a surprise if we take into

consideration the already described difficulties facing LA both in terms of its HES’s as in

its politico-economical situation towards a regional integration, contrary to what is

happening in the EU, which is already a well-structured and institutionalized block with an

advanced experience in HE harmonization and academic integration. For Lazzari (2008)

the evident disparities among the EULAC countries, particularly in LA, may be seen as the

biggest challenge for the accomplishment of the project.

The VALUE project working team, a group conceived to make this HE integration

project a reality, has stressed that, so far, the creation of the EULAC Area for HE has been

a “cold process“ with insufficient level of awareness and participation, widespread

prejudice, lack of clarity on reciprocity and mutual benefits, and lack of synergies among

the existing networks. In its statements, we note that the group did not blame any

particular of the participating regions. Nonetheless, in spite of the several weaknesses

the group pointed out, the results of a survey conducted in 2007 have shown that the

project is a desirable and addressable aim. The majority of the over 300 HE experts

2 See http://www.6x4uealc.org/ 3 See http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningal/ 4 See http://encuesta-proflex.org/

www.ocides.org


consulted in both regions, says the report, expressed their support to the aim and

confidence on its feasibility by 2015 (Project VALUE, n.d.). Contrary to this optimistic

result of the survey, Lazzari (2008) is not convinced of this feasibility by 2015. In the

analysis carried out, she concludes that the project has still a long trajectory to follow

until its establishment. She resumes her reasons in four points: First, she argues that the

project is lead basically by the governmental representatives that compose the Follow-up

Committee, without enough involvement of other stakeholders. Second, she notes more

involvement of the EU and LA than from the Caribbean. Third, she found very little

consistency in the EULAC agenda, thus it is noticed that over time, the objectives drawn

in the second Ministerial meeting in 2005 link to a very little extent to the aims proposed

in the original agreement from 2000. Finally, she argues that the Follow-up Committee is

restricting the involvement of external initiatives, even though these other initiatives

pursue similar goals of bringing the tree regions together.

Notwithstanding the substantial controversies we could find regarding the

feasibility of the EULAC Area for HE by 2015, what is clear however, is that the VALUE

working group is right in suggesting that it is necessary to accelerate and optimize the

process of integration by involving not only the Follow-up Committee, but also all other

interested actors, providing an accurate picture of what is already happening, and

defining an articulated roadmap for action with specific objectives at short and medium

term, as well as outcomes that could be achieved by 2015. What is more, the working

group emphasizes that this strategy should move forward without first waiting for the

integration of LA. According to its arguments, both processes should progress in parallel

and learn from each other. (Project VALUE, n.d.).

By referring to the risk of not taking advantage of this initiative and stopping

sharing the project's vision as a consequence of the all difficulties and obstacles that were

already mentioned, Malo (2005) emphasizes that if this happens the EU will definitely

have wasted the chance to use this opportunity to develop the largest area for HE of the

world, and LA the valuable opportunity to modernize and reflect on its HES’s, achieving

greater integration of its academic community and maintaining the strength of the

cultural ties with the nations of the EU.

www.ocides.org


4.2 Latin America and Caribbean Area for Higher Education (ENLACES)

ENLACES is the latest regional strategy of cooperation and integration in Higher

Education (HE) in Latin America (LA) and the Caribbean. The proposal of this initiative

stems from the Regional Conference on HE (CRES) held in the city of Cartagena de Indias,

Colombia in June 2008, where the participants concluded that the project was essential,

necessary and could not be delayed, so they requested to UNESCO International Institute

for HE in LA and the Caribbean (IESALC-UNESCO) to present a roadmap of the initiative

and head it in its first phase (see Declaration of the Regional Conference on Higher

Education of Latin America and the Caribbean -CRES 2008, 2008). Months later, ENLACES

was endorsed and finally sealed by key policy-makers from organizations, university

networks and Councils of Chancellors of both regions with the signature of three

important declarations: The Declaration of Panama5 in November 2008, the Declaration

of Santo Domingo6 in March 2009, and the Declaration of Lima7 in June 2009. More

recently, it has been recognized and supported by rectors of public universities and

legislators from the participating regions through the Declaration of the Bicentennial of

Quito8 in October 2009 and the Declaration of Buenos Aires9 in November 2009,

respectively.

In looking back to the proposal for creating ENLACES, we could argue that this

new initiative is aiming a duplicate agenda to that of the previous described project and

others sub-regional ones no covered in this term paper, because it address the same

principles of promotion of mobility and academic exchange in the region, the

incorporation of a system of credits and common criteria for the curricular harmonization

in order to set standards and generate inter-institutional confidence and convergence,

etc. (see Espacio Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Educación Superior, 2009a). In the

course of these considerations, it is difficult to clarify to what extent this duplicity could

5 http://www.oui-iohe.org/eles/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/the-declaration-of-panama-_ingles_-rev4-_3_.pdf 6 http://www.oui-iohe.org/eles/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/the-declaration-of-santo-domingo.pdf 7 http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve/dmdocuments/declaracion_lima_2009_EN.pdf 8 http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve/dmdocuments/cumbre.pdf 9 http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve/dmdocuments/declaracion_buenos_aires.pdf

www.ocides.org


benefit the region or bring conflicts. However, a close glance to the expressed

commitment of ENLACES shows that it by itself is not intended to replace any of these

other collaborative initiatives that have been currently undertaken in a regional and sub-

regional scale, but rather the partnership of actors, programs, projects and alliances that

it encompasses is seeking to strengthen all the actual collaborative initiatives and create

new ones, while promoting a common agenda for developing HE in the region, and a

platform to be used as an effective instrument for permanent dialogue to orchestrate

concrete actions that seek to remedy those already underscored deficiencies and gaps in

terms of regional cooperation and academic integration (IESALC, 2009)

From what is available, this regional initiative seems to be still in process of

construction and development. However, since its promulgation in CRES 2008, the

partnership has been working on a number of basic outlines, recommendations,

proposals, considerations and key agreements that have been articulated from the few

meetings held, which, undoubtedly, define a first course of this project. A first summary

of these, points out that, first, the harmonization process in ENLACES should not be

treated as synonymous of homogenization. Second, the evaluation and accreditation

mechanisms must be strengthened in order to raise the level of trust among the

universities of the region. Third, the existence of prior experiences in Europe and in the

region must be recognized in order to learn from them and determine best practices.

Fourth, a common proposal for university legislation within the region must be created.

Fifth, the actual educational model within the region must be changed. Sixth, the strategy

for jointing the curriculum should respect diversity and social relevance of the academic

programs offered by each university and country within the region. Finally, it must be

recognized that the viability of the project will be only possible with a coordinated effort

from governments, networks, institutions and academics (Espacio Latinoamericano y del

Caribe de Educación Superior, 2009b).

Among the two most significant advances we note about the project highlights:

First, the designation of the Follow-Up Committee in the meeting of Lima in June 2009,

with the participation of eight members from university network representatives and

regional leadership councils. Last, the definition of following five working axis and areas

www.ocides.org


in order to encourage its implementation: Institutional development (governments, legal

norms, and political support), academic cooperation (accreditation and evaluation,

recognition of titles, curriculum convergence, academic mobility, and distance

education), communication and information (ENLACES online), production and

management of knowledge (regional observatories, studies and publications, open

educational resources, map of HE, and virtual site for HE initiatives), and tools and

support services (see IESALC, 2009).

To achieve the proposed aims, IESALC (2009) stresses that ENLACES must

generate inter-institutional trust, overcoming, apart from the already list of challenges

discussed in section 3, its identification as just another simple regional academic

integration project because of the all skepticism that could be raised as a result of the

transcendence that we know have been suffering previous efforts. We certainly note that

within the Follow-Up Committee there is an optimistic vision of the project, and it is

believed that the proposed objectives will be achieved in a short term (IESALC, 2009).

Conclusions

Harmonization and regional integration of Higher Education systems in Latin

America (LA) are imminent and should gain momentum. The region needs to shape its

future in order to be able to compete in the new global knowledge-based society.

The European experience, which has made significant progress, confirms that the

task is indeed complex and require significant time, adequate resources, political

commitment and deeper analysis and reflection to work successfully. Undoubtedly, it

contains many lessons for LA, however, we can not guarantee that it will give the most

accurate answer being awaited by the region to overcome its multiple weaknesses and

deficiencies underscored in this term paper, due to the abysmal contextual differences

and significant disadvantages that separate the same from the old continent.

In so far, harmonization and regional academic integration in LA have been

identified as a priority within the region’s HE modernization agenda, unfortunately, their

implementations have not yet begun in any meaningful way because their rhetoric seems

to be more common than its concrete actions. We certainly note that there are a number

www.ocides.org


of strategies and targets that have been already identified and brought to the table to

promote these processes in the region. All that remains now is to take and put them to

fulfill their fruit. Of course, at first glance one could argue that to achieve this will be

critical to provide the region with resources. However, our point of view in this respect is

that the resources, although necessaries, are not the most important thing the region

needs to fulfill its endeavor. They can be reached through funding provided by

international agencies, such as the European Commission which has shown significant

interest in supporting the processes. But more than that, the region needs two aspects

we consider key and that, certainly, can not be provided at all by external entities, but

must spring from the same region. These are, first, leadership and commitment to steer

the process of coordination of efforts, and last not least, the full recognition that this is a

collective task and that dialogue, cooperation and sympathy from all the academic

community, governments, leadership networks and councils, cooperation agencies and

key-policy makers involved in the promotion of HE are fundamental to achieving this

objective. The contribution of this term paper is intended to stimulate a reflection on this

topic.

In this research work we only addressed two of the current harmonization and

academic integration in LA. However, we must recognize the existence of other sub-

regional initiatives, such as, the ones been carried out by the MERCOSUR and Central

America. All these initiatives share a similar agenda, so we must be aware that they have

significant potential for duplication of efforts which could create conflicting routes

towards harmonization. In this respect, it will be necessary effective coordination to

eliminate their unnecessary duplication of efforts and to enable them to fulfill their true

potential.

ENLACES, although is not still in full flight, bets to be that meeting point that the

region needs to advance in its process of building a common platform of regional

cooperation and academic integration which, undoubtedly, can drive the internal

dimension seeking the sub-regions and the external been seeking with the European

Union. This proposal must strike a careful balance between these two dimensions and

not create unrealistic expectations of what can be achieved within identified timeframes.

www.ocides.org


Reference list

Altbach, P., Reisberg, L. and Rumbley, L. (2009). Trends in global Higher Education: Tracking an academic

revolution (Adobe Digital Editions version).URL:

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001831/183168e.pdf (Retrieved October 20, 2009)

Beneitone, P. et al. (2007). Final report ALFA Tuning America Latina Project: Reflections on and outlook for

Higher Education in Latin America (Adobe Digital Editions

version).URL:http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningal/index.php?option=com_docman

&task=docclick&Itemid=191&bid=55&limitstart=0&limit=5 (Retrieved November 5, 2009)

Benelux Bologna Secretariat (n.d.). The official Bologna Process website 2007-2010. URL:

http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/ (Retrieved December 5, 2009)

Benelux Bologna Secretariat (2009). Bologna beyond 2010: Report on the development of the European

Higher Education area. URL: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be

/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/Beyond_2010_report_FINAL.pdf (Retrieved

December 5, 2009)

Brunner, J. (2009). The Bologna Process from a Latin American Perspective. Journal of Studies in

International Education,13,417– 438. doi: 10.1177/10283153083 29805

Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Bergen, 19-20

May 2005. (2005). URL: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/

hogeronderwijs/bologna/documents/MDC/050520_Bergen_Communique1.pdf (Retrieved

November 6, 2009)

Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Leuven and

Louvain-la-Neuve, 28-29 April 2009. (2009). URL: http://www.ond.

vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/Leuven_Louvainla-

Neuve_Communiqu%C3%A9_April_2009.pdf (Retrieved November 6, 2009)

Declaration of the Regional Conference on Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean – CRES

2008. (2008). URL: http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve /docs/wrt/declarationcres_ingles.pdf

(Retrieved November 2, 2009)

Didou, S. (2006). Internacionalización de la educación superior y provisión transnacional de servicios

educativos en América Latina: Del voluntarismo a las elecciones estratégicas. In IESALC-

UNESCO, Informe sobre la Educación Superior en América Latina y El Caribe 2000-2005 (pp. 21-32)

(Adobe Digital Editions

version).URL:http://mt.educarchile.cl/MT/jjbrunner/archives/libros/InfoES-L/ES_ AL2000-05.pdf

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. (2009). Higher Education in Europe 2009:

Developments in the Bologna Process. URL:

www.ocides.org


http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/2009_Eurydic

e_report.pdf (Retrieved October 17, 2009)

Espacio Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Educación Superior. (2009a). A proposal for the creation of a Latin

American and Caribbean area for Higher Education. URL: http://www.oui-

iohe.org/eles/en/enlaces/propuesta/ (Retrieved October 21, 2009)

Espacio Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Educación Superior. (2009b). Resumen mesas de trabajo, segunda

reunión de la iniciativa IESALC/UNESCO/OUI/UDUAL de apoyo a ENLACES. URL:

http://www.oui-iohe.org/eles/en/2009/03/10/segunda-reunion-de-la-iniciativa-

iesalcunescoouiudual-de-apoyo-a-enlaces/ (Retrieved October 21, 2009)

Estrategias hacia la construcción del espacio común ALCUE en Educación Superior. (2005). URL:

http://www.educacion.es/dctm/mepsyd/educacion/universidades/politica-

internacional/espacio-comun/10.estrategias.pdf?documentId=0901e72b80048749 (Retrieved

October 22, 2009)

European University Association. (2008). EUA policy position: The future of the Bologna Process post 2010.

URL: http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/

actionlines/documents/EUA_Position_Bologna_Post_2010_Sept08.pdf (Retrieved November

10, 2009)

Horizonte hacia la construcción del espacio común ALCUE en Educación Superior. (2005).

URL:http://www.educacion.es/dctm/mepsyd/educacion/universidades/politica-inte

rnacional/espacio-comun/9.horizonte2015.pdf?documentId=0901e72b8004875b (Retrieved

October 22, 2009)

IESALC (2009). ENLACES: A strategy of cooperation and integration. IESALC Reports, 200.URL:

http://www.iesalc.unesco.org.ve/dmdocuments/boletin_200_english.pdf (Retrieved December

5, 2009)

Lazzari, A. (2008). Europeanization of Latin American Higher Education?: The shaping of the ALCUE

common area in Higher Education. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo,

Norway. URL: http://www.elgate.eu/index.php?

option=com_rokdownloads&view=file&task=download&id=12%3Alazzari-arlete-aliandra-

raquel&Itemid=8&lang=es (Retrieved October 15, 2009)

Malo, S. (2005). El Proceso Bolonia y la Educación Superior en América Latina. Foreign Affairs en Español,

5(2), 21-33. URL: http://www.fsa.ulaval.ca/rdip/cal/lectures/ Proceso%20Bolonia.htm (Retrieved

October 15, 2009)

Mohamedbhai, G. (2005). Views on Bologna Process. URL: http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/

upload/Goolam_Mohamedbhai.1112709280347.pdf (Retrieved October 15, 2009)

Plan of action project 2002-2004 to build common ground for Higher Education in the European Union,

Latin America and the Caribbean. (2002). URL:

www.ocides.org


http://www.dges.mctes.pt/NR/rdonlyres/2CBC359C-C106-450E-BD27-544661D

69253/2434/UEALC_ES_Plan_2002_2004En.pdf (Retrieved October 26, 2009)

Project VALUE. (n.d.). Towards the common Higher Education area for Europe, Latin America and the

Caribbean. URL: http://www.value-project.eu/value/images /VALUE_WhitePaper_EN.pdf

(Retrieved November 4,2009)

Ravaioli, S. (2009). Harmonizing Higher Education: Standard perspectives in support of the Bologna

Process. URL: http://ab.org.tr/ab09/kitap/ravaioli_AB09.pdf (Retrieved November 5,2009)

Reyes, L. (n.d.). Breves reflexiones acerca de los fundamentos de la integración universitaria en América

Latina en el contexto global. URL: http://www.colmayor.edu.co/cma/

hermesoft/portal/home_1/rec/arc_872.pdf (Retrieved November 5,2009)

Teichler, U. (2007). Towards a European Higher Education area: Vision and realities. In Teichler, U. (Ed.),

Higher Education systems: Conceptual frameworks, comparative perspectives, empirical findings

(pp. 161-180). The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Tiana, A. (2009). Perspectivas y repercusiones del Proceso de Bolonia en Iberoamérica. La Cuestión

Universitaria,5,10-16. URL: http://www.lacuestionuniversitaria.upm.es/

web/grafica/articulos/imgs_boletin_5/pdfs/LCU5-2.pdf?PHPSESSID=agnb3vnat2

308c0gunchv7vim3 (Retrieved October 23, 2009)

The European Union - Latin America - Caribbean Ministerial Conference on Higher Education, Paris, 3

November 2000. (2000). URL:

http://www.vertebralcue.org/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=&func=fileinfo&id=2

⟨=en (Retrieved November 5, 2009)

Van Damme, D. (2001). Higher Education in the age of globalization: The need for a new regulatory

framework for recognition, quality assurance and accreditation.URL:

http://www.unesco.org/education/studyingabroad/highlights/global_forum/presentations/key

note_eng.doc (Retrieved October 20, 2009)

Working Group on the External Dimension of the Bologna Process. (2006). External dimension of the

Bologna Process (First report). URL:

http://www.bolognaoslo.com/expose/global/download.asp?id=28&fk=11&thumb= (Retrieved

November 5, 2009)

Yavaprabhas, S. (2008). ASEAN Higher Education area. URL:

http://www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_upload/apeid/workshops/macao08/papers/1-p-1-

3.pdf (Retrieved November 3, 2009)

Zarur, X. (2008). Regional integration and internationalization of Higher Education in Latin America and the

Caribbean. In Gazzola, A. and Didriksson, A. (Eds.), Trends in Higher Education in Latin America

and the Caribbean (pp. 173-305). Caracas: IESALC-UNESCO.

www.ocides.org


i Jahir Calvo es Ingeniero Electromecánico de la Universidad Tecnológica de Panamá, donde también posee

un Postgrado en Alta Gerencia y se desempeña como Planificador Universitario. Adicionalmente tiene un postgrado en Docencia Superior y estudios de maestría en la misma especialidad, ambos de la Universidad de Panamá. Actualmente cursa la maestría internacional en Investigación y Desarrollo de la Educación Superior en el INCHER-Kassel de la Universidad de Kassel, Alemania, gracias a una beca otorgada por el Gobierno Panameño y el Servicio Alemán de Intercambio Académico (DAAD).

latin america towards imminent processes of harmonization ...€¦ · latin america towards...

Documents